Star prosecutor’s sullied record again in spotlight

Hey there, time traveller!
This article was published 17/07/2023 (781 days ago), so information in it may no longer be current.

Two Indigenous men wrongly convicted of murder nearly five decades ago will find out this week whether they will face a new trial.

On Tuesday in a Winnipeg courtroom, Brian Anderson and Allan Woodhouse will appear before a Court of King’s Bench judge to find out whether Manitoba Justice will proceed to a new trial, or opt for another option that would spare both men having to endure another full proceeding.

The two men will be represented by Jerome Kennedy and James Lockyer, lawyers with Toronto-based Innocence Canada that has been working for several years to overturn the convictions.

Both Anderson and Woodhouse, originally from the Pinaymootang First Nation (formerly known as Fairford First Nation) were convicted of murdering Ting Fong Chan, 40, in July 1973.

In June, federal Justice Minister David Lametti quashed the murder convictions of Anderson and Woodhouse after reviewing new evidence “not before the courts” at the time of their original trials or appeals. Under powers granted to him by the Criminal Code, Lametti ordered Manitoba to hold a new trial for both men.

It is unclear whether or not Manitoba Justice will elect to hold a new trial. However, the prospects of starting an entirely new proceeding now — nearly a half century after the first trial — are remote.

In other similar cases where a historical murder conviction has been quashed many years after the original trial, provincial prosecution services have typically found a way to abandon the case.

This can be done by entering a stay of proceedings, which is generally opposed by the applicant because it leaves open the question of guilt or innocence. Prosecutors could also decide to simply withdraw the charges, which again creates ambiguity about the guilt of the applicant.

In cases where there is compelling evidence of innocence, advocates for the wrongfully convicted request that prosecutors attend a court hearing, whereupon they present no evidence, which results in an acquittal. This is considered the strongest and clearest way a prosecution service can acknowledge that a conviction was not just a miscarriage of justice, but a case where the person convicted of the crime is factually innocent.

If a new trial is not convened, it would serve as yet another black mark on the career of celebrated prosecutor George Dangerfield.

The Crown’s top prosecutor for most of his storied career, Dangerfield is now the author of five wrongful convictions. Prior to Anderson and Woodhouse, Dangerfield wrongfully convicted Thomas Sophonow, Frank Ostrowski, James Driskell and Kyle Unger.

The Sophonow and Driskell cases prompted Manitoba to hold judicial inquiries, both of which raised serious concerns about Dangerfield’s actions in overseeing the prosecutions. In the Driskell case, the inquiry concluded that the conduct of three Crown attorneys, including Dangerfield, “fell below then existing professional standards expected of lawyers and agents of the attorney general.”

The Anderson and Woodhouse convictions would be the oldest of all Dangerfield’s wrongful convictions.

Chan, a chef at the Beachcomber restaurant and a father of two, was walking home after work on the night of July 17, 1973, when he was beaten and stabbed to death. Anderson, one of four men eventually convicted of the murder, had moved to Winnipeg only a year earlier and barely spoke or understood English.

All of the accused allegedly confessed to the murder, but all four men claimed during the trial they had been forced or tricked into signing written confessions. Anderson claimed he was told he was signing an “administrative form” of some sort and had no idea it was a confession.

Anderson was convicted of first-degree murder and sentenced to life with no chance of parole for 10 years; he was granted full parole in 1987. Woodhouse, also convicted of first-degree murder, was released on full parole in 1990.

Winnipeg Free Press | Newsletter

Dan Lett | Not for Attribution

Tuesdays

A weekly look at politics close to home and around the world.

Sign up for Dan Lett | Not for Attribution

Sign Up

I agree to the Terms and Conditions, Cookie and Privacy Policies, and CASL agreement.

Innocence Canada has argued the convictions, and the single-minded work of the Winnipeg Police Service to connect the four Indigenous men to this crime, was motivated by systemic racism.

Both Anderson and Woodhouse applied for a review by the federal justice minister under Sec. 696 of the Criminal Code.

Lametti also this year ordered a new appeal in another Dangerfield case involving Robert Sanderson, who was convicted of three counts of first-degree murder in 1997. Sanderson has been released on parole pending a review by the Manitoba Court of Appeal. If successful, it would be the sixth case of wrongful conviction involving Dangerfield.

dan.lett@winnipegfreepress.com

katrina.clarke@winnipegfreepress.com

Dan Lett
Columnist

Born and raised in and around Toronto, Dan Lett came to Winnipeg in 1986, less than a year out of journalism school with a lifelong dream to be a newspaper reporter.

   Read full biography

Katrina Clarke
Investigative reporter

Katrina Clarke is an investigative reporter with the Winnipeg Free Press.

   Read full biography